Re: Non-Last Small IPv6 Fragments

On 2019-01-15 07:47, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote on 14/01/2019 18:39:
>> On 14 Jan 2019, at 18:12, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>>> Tom Herbert wrote on 14/01/2019 17:58:
>>>> I don't know what it means to "reassemble fragments in the network".
>>>> Reassembly is specified as an operation at destination end points.
>>>
>>> some types of stateful middleboxes do in-line reassembly.
>>>
>>> There are many horrors on the Internet.
>>
>> And maybe it’s time to call them out, say screw them, and either people 
>> have to live with broken stuff or get end-to-end connectivity again.   
>> Maybe it’s time to stop catering for the brokenness and control of 
>> others.  Maybe it’s time to play it hard.
> 
> End-to-end died the day the IETF published rfc1631.

The IETF didn't publish RFC1631. The RFC Editor published it. Although
the Independent Submissions stream hadn't been formally named at that
time, that's what this was.

   Brian

> 
> In-line reassembly may be distasteful but in the scale of things it 
> doesn't cause massive breakage for the types of clients it attempts to 
> provide service to.
> 
> There are lots of other things that are far worse offenders, e.g. 
> encoding transport endpoint values inside data streams (here's looking 
> at you, SIP).
> 
> Nick
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 